Salmon Fishing in the Yemen Director: Lasse Hallström Writers: Simon Beaufoy (screenplay), Paul Torday (novel) Stars: Ewan McGregor, Emily Blunt and Amr Waked MPAA Rating: PG-13 HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Salmon Fishing in the Yemen, as the name suggests, is the story of a man with the impossible dream of bringing fly fishing to the desert. Director Lasse Hallström has a similarly impossible dream of making a film that is a feel good story, an examination of faith, a look at British-Middle Eastern relations, biting political satire and a romantic comedy. Unfortunately, due to its overreaching scope, Salmon Fishing in the Yemen, while highly enjoyable in parts, ends up being an uneven and ultimately underwhelming movie.

The film devotes the most time and is most successful with its romantic subplot. Dr. Alfred Jones (Ewan McGregor) is an expert on salmon who is reluctantly recruited to take the lead on this project, despite the fact that he’s convinced it will never work. The project comes along right as his personal life is falling apart. His wife Mary (Rachael Stirling) decides to take a job in Geneva without even consulting him about it, deciding that the time apart will be good for both of them.

Dr. Jones has to work alongside the lovely Harriet (Emily Blunt), who is the assistant to the sheikh financing the salmon project. Harriet is dealing with her own problematic love life as her boyfriend of three weeks, Capt. Robert Mayers (Tom Mison), is called up to the front lines in Afghanistan.

Dr. Jones and Harriet get off to a rocky start working together, since he tends to be a bit humorless and rough around the edges, but eventually the two bond over their passion for the work and their respect for Sheikh Muhammed (Amr Waked), who is a soft spoken, unorthodox visionary.

While the film is successful on portraying Harriet and Dr. Jones’ chaotic love lives and their strange bond, it is less successful in examining the sheikh and the Yemen culture at large. Sheikh Muhammed is portrayed as an almost god-like figure, benevolent and peaceful and trusting that this impossible dream of his is the necessary step to bring a hopeful new future to his people. There is no depth or nuance to the character in the limited amount of screen time he gets, which keeps him from feeling like a real person. It’s hard not to see him at times as a “noble savage” type character who exists in order to teach the British characters valuable life lessons.

On the opposite side of that, the group of people in Yemen who oppose him are portrayed as cartoonishly evil. They believe that this salmon project is Muhammed’s attempt to bring the Western culture to their land, ruining their culture and dishonoring God. They border on terrorist stereotypes as they decide acts of violence are the best way to shut down this project.

The film also attempts to establish a discussion about faith between Dr. Jones and Sheikh Muhammed. Jones doesn’t believe in the project from the onset because of the number of hurdles that must be overcome and the number of uncertain variables. He doesn’t think the salmon will survive the trip to or be able to adjust to the warmer climate in Yemen. The sheikh keeps trying to convince him to have some faith, which is a foreign concept to a man of science like Jones. The faith-science debate that goes on between these two men from very different cultures is overly ham-handed and simplistic.

While its look at Yemen falls flat, the film’s jabs at British politics and bureaucracy add some of the best laughs to the film. Kristin Scott Thomas gives a great performance as Patricia Maxwell, the British prime minister’s press secretary. Maxwell is the one fast tracking the salmon fishing project in order to gin up some positive publicity for the prime minister. Scott Thomas’ performance is reminiscent of Jane Lynch’s role on Glee, injecting a healthy dose of sarcasm and cynicism into the film to keep it from feeling too sappy or too lightweight. Most importantly though, she commands your attention every time she’s on screen and turns in an incredibly funny performance.

There are certainly a lot of great performances throughout the film. Ewan McGregor and Emily Blunt are both great and have a natural chemistry with each other. Amr Waked is also quite good as the sheikh, though I wish his character had been developed more.

Your enjoyment of this film will hinge on what you are looking to get out of it. If you are simply interested in a funny, quirky film with a decent, though predictable, romantic plotline, then you’ll most likely enjoy it. But if you were hoping the film delivered more on its examination of Yemen-English relations, its characterization of the Yemen people or its discussion of faith, then ultimately you’ll be disappointed.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Similar Posts:

• Review – The Five-Year Engagement

John Carter Release Date: March 9, 2012 Director: Andrew Stanton Writers: Andrew Stanton & Mark Andrews and Michael Chabon (screenplay), Edgar Rice Burroughs (story A Princess of Mars) Stars: Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins and Willem Dafoe MPAA Rating: PG-13 HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Disney seem very unsure of how to sell John Carter.

They’ve clearly spent a lot of money on a massive marketing campaign, but the campaign itself has done little more than make people aware that the film is called John Carter and that it stars a scantily-clad Taylor Kitsch fighting strange creatures in a desert.

You’d never know that the story takes place on Mars or that the giant green four-armed creatures – the Tharks – that are barely shown in the spots actually factor prominently into the story. (I remember the very first trailer I ever saw, which used Peter Gabriel’s cover of “My Body is a Cage” quite effectively, only used a voiceover from Willem Dafoe, not even making it clear that Dafoe was one of the Tharks.) The fact that the film is based on a hundred-year-old story by Edgar Rice Burroughs is downplayed as well. As is the fact that the story takes place post-Civil War and that Carter was an accomplished Confederate soldier.

Even the Disney name itself is downplayed, presumably to keep people from thinking this is a kid’s movie. Instead, the latest round of trailers informs the viewer that this is a film from the studio that brought you Pirates of the Caribbean and Alice in Wonderland.

All of this is presumably to keep from alienating people who might be scared away by knowing it’s essentially a period piece about a Confederate soldier who somehow winds up on Mars in the middle of a Civil War on that planet taking place between three different factions – two who look human and the third the aforementioned four-armed green people.

While I can somewhat understand Disney’s apprehension, I don’t really think they have anything to worry about. While the film is definitely sci-fi, it’s incredibly accessible to the average viewer and provides the audience with a beautifully-shot and rather fun adventure/love story.

Even if you can’t keep track of all of the strange names – like Barsoom, which is what the natives call Mars – you can still follow the plot quite easily. You may not be able to remember that the good human-like clan live in Hellium and the evil human-like clan live in Zodanga, but you don’t need to because the good guys wear blue sashes and the bad guys wear red ones.

It helps to that we are following John Carter in his journey since he is also an outsider who is unfamiliar with the inhabitants and history of Mars (or Barsoom). Carter finds an amulet in a cave, which transports him to Mars, causing him to wake up in the middle of the desert. He discovers that he can leap tall buildings in a single bound and has enhanced strength thanks to the different gravitational pull on the red planet.

His newfound superpowers make him appealing to the Tharks – the four-armed green guys – who enslave him and hope to use him as their ace in the hole against the other human-like creatures on Barsoom, who have superior weapons and technology to the Tharks.

Meanwhile, the Princess of Helium, Dejah Thoris (Lynn Collins), is being pressured by her father to marry the brutish Sab Than, Prince of Zodanga (Dominic West), in order to put an end to the war between the two cities. Dejah crosses paths with John Carter and decides she’d rather take her chances with the handsome superman and his band of green aliens than stick around and marry Sab Than.

Like Pirates of the Caribbean, the film has a good balance of action, comedy and romance. The plot moves along fairly quickly and there’s always enough big action sequences and silly jokes to keep you from getting bored. There is even a super-fast, adorable puppy-like creature that follows Carter around the planet.

The film itself looks quite beautiful. You can tell a lot of money was put into the CGI effects, making the battle sequences all seem grand and epic. The Tharks and all of the other creatures on Mars are well-rendered. I was especially impressed by the eyes – which have often seemed like an Achilles heel for computer animators, but in this film seem quite lifelike.

Also, while I am by no means a fan of the 3D craze in films, I will say that John Carter had some of the best 3D effects that I’ve seen. You can tell that this wasn’t one of those rushed postproduction 3D conversions, which often leave the film looking too dark and give underwhelming effects. Thought and effort was put into the 3D and if that technology is your cup of tea, then you’ll enjoy the effects in this movie.

The acting is quite good as well. Taylor Kitsch, known previously for his work on Friday Night Lights, shows he has the chops to be an effective action star. Lynn Collins gives a captivating performance as the love interest and instead of simply being a damsel in distress, she gets to be an accomplished warrior as well. Willem Dafoe, who can at times seem overly-cartoony in a film like this, is quite enjoyable as well. So is Dominic West, who manages to make you instantly dislike his character the moment you see him.

So while Disney seems a bit apprehensive about this film, they really have nothing to fear. Sure, it’s a sci-fi period piece, but it’s an incredibly entertaining one. Fans of Burroughs’ books may not love all of the changes that have been made to the story, but I think the average audience member will find something enjoyable in this one.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Similar Posts:

• Review – The Boondock Saints (Blu-ray)
• Hobo Radio 196 – We cracked our wang

Wanderlust Release Date: February 24, 2012 Director: David Wain Writers: David Wain and Ken Marino Stars: Paul Rudd, Jennifer Aniston and Malin Akerman MPAA Rating: R HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Your enjoyment of Wanderlust will probably hinge on how much you like Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston.

The film centers around a New York couple – George (Rudd) and Linda (Aniston) – who find themselves unemployed and unable to afford their new apartment. So George must suck it up and move to Atlanta to take a job working for his pompous brother Rick (Ken Marino).

On the drive to Atlanta, George and Linda happen upon a bed and breakfast named Elysium, which turns out to be a commune. After getting fed up with Rick, on a whim George decides to head back to the commune to live, bringing Linda reluctantly along with him.

If you are a fan of Rudd – particularly in his goofier comedic roles like The 40 Year Old Virgin, Wet Hot American Summer and Role Models – then you will enjoy his role as George. Rudd is a talent actor, but he seems most in his element in ridiculous comedic roles. As George, he is often playing the straight man to the other, wackier characters, but he still gets some great comedic moments himself. One of the funniest scenes in the film is Rudd alone in front of a bathroom mirror trying to psych himself up for something. It is an amazingly funny and very painful scene to watch unfold.

But while he gets a lot of laughs, Rudd is also the emotional core of the film. Rudd needs to be able to sell this bizarre idea of giving up on his regular life and moving into this commune, which he is able to do. We need George as the character we can relate to in order to ground the film and make the other, more outlandish characters work. Rudd is able to do that, which allows the rest of the film to work.

Linda is a more problematic character. Since Paul is the protagonist, the audience is more prone to side with him. And as the film unfolds, Linda makes a series of decisions that are against Paul, including one major decision. While the film does a good job explaining why she makes these choices and showing how Paul’s actions facilitated them, it still makes it difficult to sympathize with Linda.

If you are a fan of Aniston, you will probably be able to see things from her character’s point of view and to understand Linda’s actions. But if you aren’t a big fan of Aniston going into the film, the writing makes her a tough character to like. The major decision she makes, which sets up a number of plot elements both comedically and thematically, is likely to alienate her from a lot of viewers.

The supporting cast is quite enjoyable. Fans of The State and of Wet Hot American Summer will recognize a lot of the people living at Elysium. Joe Lo Truglio steals all of the scenes he’s in as Wayne, the nudist/aspiring political thriller novelist. Kerri Kenney is also quite enjoyable as Kathi, another one of the odd inhabitants of Elysium. Malin Akerman is great as Eva, a free spirit who nonchalantly tells George she’d enjoy making love to him. Lauren Ambrose, Kathryn Hahn and Jordan Peele do a great job rounding out the Elysium cast.

Michael Ian Black, Michael Showalter and David Wain all have cameos in the film as obnoxious anchormen who harass Jessica St. Clair’s anchorwoman character as she’s trying to deliver a story.

Wain does a good job balancing the sillier elements like the newscast scene with the overall plot. Unlike Wet Hot American Summer, which felt mostly likely a collection of funny scenes loosely tied together with a threadbare overarcing plot, Wanderlust feels like a cohesive film with occasional silly diversions thrown in there. Having a commune as the setting allows Wain and Marino to present us with outlandish characters, but having George and Linda there too keeps it from being too ridiculous and difficult to relate to.

Your feelings on Paul Rudd, Jennifer Aniston and David Wain’s comedic style will ultimately determine whether or not you enjoy this film. But if you are a fan of Rudd and Wain and are at least somewhat sympathetic toward Aniston, you should ultimately find this film to be a pleasant bit absurd of comedy.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Similar Posts:

• Review – Marley & Me (Blu-ray)
• Hobo Radio 145 – Lars finally peaks
• Outside of the In-Crowd – The sad state of chick flicks
• Outside of the In-Crowd – Reality people don’t count
• Outside of the In-Crowd – The Anonymity Awards

Act of Valor Release Date: February 24, 2012 Directors: Mike McCoy, Scott Waugh Writer: Kurt Johnstad Stars: Alex Veadov, Roselyn Sanchez and Nestor Serrano MPAA Rating: R HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Thanks to the use of real active duty US Navy SEALS in the lead roles, the makers of Act of Valor give moviegoers a unique cinematic experience. Unfortunately, they just don’t actually give the audience a very good film.

Act of Valor tells the story of an elite SEAL team tasked with rescuing a CIA asset who has been kidnapped, a mission that uncovers a deeper plot posing a great threat to Americans. Terrorist Christo (Alex Veadov) has obtained a collection of untraceable explosive vests that he plans to smuggle into the United States to set off at various densely populated areas. The SEALS have to track down Christo and his men to stop the plot in time.

The film claims to be “inspired by true events,” though that’s often Hollywood speak for “we made most of this up.” Whether Christo’s plan is based on a real terrorist plot or not, there isn’t much subtlety in the film’s storyline. The good guys are clearly good and the bad guys are clearly bad. The film is also filled with most of the normal war film tropes, like the teary goodbye with the wife, the letter to a fallen comrades’ young son and the selfless act of bravery to save the rest of the squad.

The writers never really fleshed out the characters in the film. And because of the acting limitations of the SEALS, the characters don’t have any added depth or nuance trained actors could have provided. The quiet, emotional scenes never quite ring true and often end up feeling a bit trite. Line deliveries are generally wooden and forced. Many of the SEALS with smaller parts deliver lines as if they are simply trying to remember all of the words and get them out in the correct order. (Perhaps by design, the actual actors in the movie don’t give performances that are much better.) Mostly, you just find yourself waiting for the next big action sequence whenever a dialogue-heavy emotional scene comes on.

The one notable standout is the man who plays Master Chief (the names of the SEALS who appear in the film have not been released since they are all active duty). He is by far the most relaxed on camera and he has a natural screen presence. His interrogation of Christo is by far the best non-action scene in the movie.

The writers don’t help things much either. Most of the dialogue and plot points are incredibly cliched and not particularly well-written. The scenes that have the most emotional resonance are the ones that go easy on the dialogue and simply show these men doing what they would actually do in the situation. There is one touching scene where the surviving SEAL members stick their pins to their fallen brother’s casket during his military funeral, an authentic moment which carries a lot more weight than anything written by the makers of the film.

Of course, the moment where the SEALS and the filmmakers shine are during the action sequences. Using real Navy SEALS and the actual equipment and weapons they use on missions does add a level of authenticity to the film. They way they move and operate is something that Hollywood rarely can or even seeks to genuinely recreate. Watching the SEALS work as a team to take out their targets is truly a joy.

Wisely, the filmmakers borrow heavily from the Modern Warfare video games in the aesthetic of the action sequences. There are a lot of first-person POV shots which make you feel like you are moving as part of the SEAL team. And even the map sequences that show you when the team deploys to a new location look like something out of the Modern Warfare games. That’s certainly going to win them brownie points with the younger demographic.

The film would have been better served adopting a faux documentary style. The non-action scripted scenes could have been abandoned in favor of talking head interviews with the SEALS setting up the mission we are about to witness. The filmmakers could have also given the SEALS leeway to set things up in their own words instead of having to deliver word-for-word dialogue from the script, which would have helped them sound more natural. It also would have spared us from the cliched dramatic scenes, which are clearly not this team’s forte.

Still, if you are interested in the SEALS or simply looking for some fun, mindless action, you’ll probably still enjoy this film (and be willing to look the other way with regards to the acting and script problems). It’s by no means a great film, but it is a unique filmgoing experience.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Safe House Release Date: February 10, 2012 Director: Daniel Espinosa Writer: David Guggenheim Stars: Denzel Washington, Ryan Reynolds and Vera Farmiga MPAA Rating: R HoboTrashcan’s Rating:

Safe House is being advertised as a psychological thriller where Denzel Washington’s Tobin Frost gets in the head of green CIA agent Matt Weston (Ryan Reynolds). I really wish that’s what the film actually was, since it inevitably would have been better than the film we ended up with.

Instead, Safe House is a poorly-conceived and poorly-shot action film that hopes to deliver enough gunfire and car chases to distract you from its non-sensical plot. The psychological element mainly consists of Frost telling Weston “I’m already in your head,” but then never once showing any evidence that he actually is by getting any psychological advantage over the inexperienced CIA agent.

Weston is stuck in a dead-end position in the CIA. For the past year, he’s been in charge of an unused agency safe house in Cape Town, South Africa. Weston begs his superiors to reassign him, but they don’t seem to trust him enough to give him actual field work. So Matt goes to work every day, babysitting an empty building. He’s settled in quite comfortably to his uneventful life in South Africa, finding a girlfriend who is clueless about his CIA position and inventing an elaborate cover story that includes details about the personal lives of his fictional coworkers.

Tobin Frost is a former CIA operative who turned against the agency and went into work for himself. He’s one of the most wanted men in America. When things go bad for Frost as he’s attempting to collect some incredibly valuable information in Cape Town, he decides the only way to elude those pursuing him is to walk into the U.S. consulate and surrender himself. That puts him inside Weston’s safe house and supposedly inside Weston’s head.

But it doesn’t take long for the safe house to be hit and the two of them to end up on the lam waiting for the calvary to arrive. Frost still doesn’t use the opportunity to get in Weston’s head. They have a few short conversations, but most of them are interrupted by the next big action scene. And while Frost is portrayed as being an evil genius (the CIA brass uses one of my favorite movie cliches, informing us that Frost “tested off the charts” on all of their exams), he mainly gets out of jams using force instead of intellect.

It probably still could have worked as a fast-paced action film, but the script and the editing keep it from even working on that level.

Safe House is full of plot points that are frustratingly ill-conceived. Like, for example, the fact that the CIA, which has absolutely no faith in Weston’s ability to keep Frost contained, sends the agent to a soccer stadium in the middle of a game to pick up a “drop bag” giving him a rendezvous point. Who could have possibly thought that was a good idea? There are way too many unpredictable elements like the local police, the crowd and Frost himself. And, of course, things go bad quickly.

The end of the film, which attempts to give us a “shocking swerve,” is even worse. The big reveal makes little sense if you stop to think about it for more than a few seconds and the big climactic scene is an orgy of gunfire and explosions, hoping to distract you from just how much the entire plot has fallen apart at that point.

In addition to the underwhelming story, director Daniel Espinosa makes the film practically unwatchable with his stylistic decisions. Most of the film is shot with handheld cameras, which can work in small doses, but becomes frustrating when everything you see is shaky and hard to track. Plus, Espinosa is overly fond of extreme close ups focusing on things like people’s hands or their left nostril.

Action sequences are impossible to follow since they feature the perfect storm of shaky camera work, odd close ups and quick editing. It’s hard to keep track of which character is which and who is doing what with the way Espinosa continually switches the focus. Several times I thought Frost or Weston had been injured by an attacker only to eventually figure out they were the one doing the injuring. The goal of that style of filming is to add tension and to make the action feel more extreme, but if it’s impossible to track what’s happening in the scene, it loses all impact.

Denzel Washington is charming and exciting to watch in the film, though even his charm isn’t enough to save this one. Ryan Reynolds is fine as Weston, though unremarkable. Vera Farmiga and Brendan Gleeson are both good as upper level CIA agents attempting to fix the volatile situation Weston and Frost are in. Robert Patrick is actually billed quite high in the credits of this film, but he only has a blink-and-you’ll-miss-it cameo, which, like so many things in this film, is disappointing.

Generally, I am a fan of Denzel Washington’s movies and I tend to give his action films more leeway than I do with other actor’s films. But even with low expectations, this film fails on just about every level. If you are a fan of Washington like I am, you are better off simply watching Man on Fire or Fallen on DVD again than wasting your money on this film.

Written by Joel Murphy. If you enjoy his reviews, he also writes a weekly pop culture column called Murphy’s Law, which you can find here. You can contact Joel at murphyslaw@hobotrashcan.com.

Similar Posts:

• Hobo Radio 57 – Sax appeal
• Murphy’s Law – Top five Valentine’s Day man-crushes
• Murphy’s Law – You had me at Denzel
• Hobo Radio 162 – Everybody hates Lars
• Murphy’s Law – I hate myself for wanting to see The Change-Up